Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 16:43:00 +0100
From: Mark Watson
STONEWALL NEWSLETTER
PRIDE SPECIAL - JUNE 1996
FROM THE DIRECTOR'S DESK
Dear Prime Minister,
We were very disturbed to read reports of your criticism of awards given
by the National Lottery Charities Board to a number of lesbian and gay
groups.
Although we have obviously disagreed on a number of issues
concerning lesbian and gay rights we always thought that you, at least,
would give us a fair hearing. We were also encouraged by some of the
clear statements on behalf of the government. For instance during the
debate on the Sexual Orientation Discrimination Bill, Baroness Miller of
Hendon said in the House of Lords: "The Government's position is clear.
We oppose unjustified discrimination against any person on grounds of
their sex, race, colour, ethnic origin or for any other reason,
irrespective of where that discrimination occurs..... Unjustified
discrimination is offensive to decent people everywhere and it is to be
condemned." (House of Lords, 14 July l995)
Your dismissal, without it seems any investigation, of grants
given to lesbian and gay groups suggests, at the very least, that you
are willing to be careless of that principle, that you do not think that
we deserve to treated equally.
Stonewall has worked very closely with GALOP, one of the groups
in receipt of a grant. GALOP is based in London and works closely with
the Metropolitan Police to provide support and assistance to victims of
homophobic violence. I enclose a copy of a national survey we have just
produced which shows that 1 in 3 gay men and 1 in 4 lesbians have
experienced at least one violent attack in the last five years. The
figures for lesbians and gay men under 18 are much higher, half of this
group had been the subject of a violent attack.
It is prejudice that breeds this violence. A prejudice which
your statements helped to endorse. I do hope that you will take the
opportunity to condemn this prejudice and address the feelings of deep
anger and dismay which your remarks have generated.
Yours sincerely
Angela Mason
Executive Director
Stonewall
FEEDBACK
Your views
Schoolkids for equality
We are Sharon, Kate, Amardeep and Emma who are students at Finham Park
Comprehensive School. We have very strong views on how Homosexuals are
treated. We think that they should be treated equally as Heterosexuals.
We want people who normally discriminate against them to try and see it
from their point of view. So we have asked our English teacher if we
could have a debate, but she said that we could make a presentation.
But in order to do this we need to have some information and facts. So
we were wondering if you would be kind enough to send us some. We have
sent a SAE so that you do not have to pay for it.
Sharon, Kate, Amardeep, Emma
Coventry
This letter is typical of the many requests for information we receive
from students. The next generation is on our side!
A letter to Euan Sutherland...
Congratulations on your success at Strasbourg! Thank you for your
courage and tenacity in taking the case for an equal age of consent in
the UK to the European Commisssion. Living in fear, as many of us have
done in our youth, wrought great mental anguish leaving lasting scars in
some cases.
A positive outcome, thanks to your efforts and actions, would
mark a significant milestone along the road to a fair and balanced
lifestyle for us all.
I wish you every success in your efforts - and great happiness
and joy in your private life.
John
Glasgow
...and one to Chris Morris
Having just written to Euan Sutherland we wished to send a similar
message to you. We believe it is very brave and forthright of you to
take the matter to the European Commission on Human Rights and we admire
you immensely for the action you are taking. Even though you have the
wonderful support and professionalism of Stonewall to back you up, it
still takes a lot of guts to do what you are doing.
For us to remember how we were at your age we need to go back
many years, and we cannot imagine having had the courage to do what you
are doing. This makes our admiration for you even greater. It is very
easy for older people to sound trite, or condescending, but when we say
how great it is to witness young people such as yourself boldly setting
the agenda for the future we are being totally truthful. Thanks to
organisations such as Stonewall things are gradually getting better, and
thanks to people such as yourself the getting better gets better
quicker.
John and Richard
Isle of Wight
LISA AND JILL SET THEIR SIGHTS ON EUROPE
"BR" case could make history
Lisa Grant and Jill Percey, the lesbian couple who are suing Lisa's
employer South West Trains for a free travel pass for Jill as Lisa's
partner, now hope to have their case referred to the European Court of
Justice.
The case was heard by Southampton Industrial Tribunal on 1 May -
two days after the European Court decided that it is sex discrimination
to dismiss a transsexual (see right). Cherie Booth QC, representing
Lisa Grant, argued that the same principle should apply in this case.
South West Trains argued that there is no sex discrimination since
lesbians and gay men are subject to the same unfavourable treatment!
The tribunal seemed very sympathetic to Lisa and Jill's case and seemed
to think that the decision in the transsexual case was indeed relevant.
The Tribunal could now find in favour of Lisa and Jill, it could
find for South West Trains - but we think that is unlikely - or it could
refer the issue to the European Court of Justice for a ruling on whether
it is sex discrimination for South West Trains to refuse to give Jill a
travel pass just because they are both women.
Following the decision in the transsexual case a case does now
need to be referred to the ECJ to establish whether the same principle
applies to sexuality discrimination. If this happens the case could be
a landmark test case - if Lisa and Jill won, it would change the law
overnight.
Meanwhile the other claim against South West Trains, that they
are in breach of contract by failing to follow their own equal
opportunities policy, looks set to be heard by the High Court in July.
"P" WINS HER CASE
Transsexual breakthrough
In a landmark case the European Court of Justice has ruled that it is
unlawful under European law to discriminate against transsexuals. On 29
April the Court held that sacking a person who had undergone a sex
change was sex discrimination contrary to the Equal Treatment Directive.
The ruling has immediate effect throughout the public sector,
and the government will now have to change the law to ensure that
private sector employers also comply with it.
A transsexual has already initiated proceedings against the
armed forces in the wake of the ruling.
The ruling is significant for lesbians and gay men because the
Court agreed that "sex discrimination" should be given a broad
interpretation.
Traditionally in Britain lawyers have argued that it is not sex
discrimination to discriminate against transsexuals (or homosexuals), so
long as transsexuals (or homosexuals) of both sexes are equally badly
treated.
The Court rejected that argument in the case of transsexuals and
we believe this makes it very likely that it will also reject the same
argument in relation to lesbians and gay men.
NEWS IN BRIEF
SOD Bill
The SOD Bill passed its final stages in the House of Lords on 1 May.
Glenda Jackson MP has agreed to sponsor it in the House of Commons. She
will table it on 12 July but sadly it is likely to be killed by a single
word from the government benches: "object".
Shop for Equality!
Virgin Megastores hosted Britain's first ever lesbian and gay shoppers
evening at their Oxford Street, London store on Thursday 4 July in aid
of Stonewall. Hosted by Amy Lame, the evening launched a series of
ventures between Stonewall and Virgin Megastores over the coming months.
The big announcement of the evening was Virgin's sponsorship of
the 1996 Stonewall Equality Show which will take place at the Royal
Albert Hall on Sunday 27 October.
Stonewall - the movie
The second big announcement at the shopping evening was the news that
Virgin will donate a pound to Stonewall for each copy of the film
"Stonewall" they sell on video. This special promotion was launched by
Angela Mason who received a huge pound coin from Simon Burke, Managing
Director of Virgin Our Price.
Book Now for Equality Show
While Ian McKellen and Mig Kimpton work furiously on a cast list that
will be even more impressive than in previous years, priority postal
booking for Stonewall supporters opens on 15 July. All Stonewall
supporters have a full month to book for Stonewall's annual
extravaganza. Stonewall supporters can obtain booking forms by calling
the Stonewall office. Public booking and booking by telephone will open
on 12 August. From then on tickets can be booked by calling the Royal
Albert Hall Box Office on 0171 589 8212.
EUAN WINS THROUGH
European Court of Human Rights to hear his case
On 21 May the European Commission on Human Rights ruled that Euan
Sutherland's complaint about the unequal age of consent should be heard
by the European Court of Human Rights.
Euan travelled to Strasbourg for the hearing accompanied by his
father and Angela Mason. His barrister Peter Duffy argued that the
unequal age of consent is a breach of article 8 (the right to privacy)
and article 14 (the right to the protection of the Convention without
discrimination on any grounds). He argued that it is particularly wrong
that under Britain's laws on gay sex, a person who is under age is
himself guilty of a criminal offence if he has sex. A law which
supposedly exists to protect young gay men actually criminalises them.
The British government for their part tried to argue that what was at
stake was the right of parents to have their children grow up
heterosexual!
This is the eighth application concerning the age of consent and
it is the first time the Commision has ruled that the case should
proceed to the European Court of Human Rights. It will probaby take
another two years before the case is heard.
GAY MAN TO FIGHT DISMISSAL FROM SCOUTS
A gay man who was thrown out of the Scouts after volunteering for 10-20
hours a week for the last 21 years has decided to fight the decision.
Stephen Lack, an outreach worker with Lesbian and Gay Alliance
Northampton, was thrown out of the Scouts after his sexuality came to
light through an article in a social services newsletter about his
appointment to his current day job.
Dozens of scouts, parents and leaders have written to protest
at his dismissal but the County Commissioner was adamant that he had to
go and could not remain in the Scouts in any capacity. There is no
complaint about Stephen Lack's actual behaviour. In fact the
Commissioner had known he was gay for some time but says that by
allowing it to become public Stephen Lack has brought the Scouts into
disrepute.
Stephen turned to Stonewall for advice. We suggested he see a
lawyer and try to get it taken up as an employment discrimination case.
If Lisa Grant succeeds in her claim that sexuality discrimination is sex
discrimination (see p.3) then Stephen may also have a case
notwithstanding that he was not paid as a volunteer.
Stephen has also asked that Stonewall supporters send letters of
protest to Mr Brian Mutlow, County Commissioner, Northamptonshire
Scouts, Abington Vale Scouts Centre, 10 Bridgewater Drive, Northampton
NN3 3AF. Please send copies of your letter and/or letters of support to
Stephen c/o Stonewall.
ARMED FORCES BAN: PREJUDICE PREVAILS
Government whips to keep ban for as long as it can
It was the most important debate on gay rights since the age of consent
vote two years ago. On 9 May a proposal to lift the ban tabled by
Edwina Currie, Michael Brown and Gerald Kaufman was defeated by 188
votes to 120. Once again it seemed we had won the argument but lost the
vote. This time it was not a genuine free vote: the Conservatives
imposed a three line whip and the debate was scheduled at very short
notice on a Thursday evening when many MPs already had previous
engagements; nearly the entire Welsh Labour Party was already in Wales
for the Welsh Labour Party conference. It was hardly a decision of the
whole house.
Labour's position on the armed forces remains far from clear.
It was agreed in Shadow Cabinet that the party would be given a free
vote, and most of those who did vote voted to lift the ban, but Tony
Blair abstained, Labour's spokesman on the armed forces John Reid spoke
from the despatch box against lifting the ban, and all five Labour MPs
on the Select Committee voted against lifting the ban. The next day
Tony Blair told Radio 4 Today "I believe that homosexual people should
not be banned or discharged from the military merely by reason of the
fact that they are gay." However he then went on to say that any change
would have to be negotiated with the armed forces "in a way that takes
account of the concerns of the military". He refused to be drawn on
what he would do should these objectives prove impossible to reconcile.
The campaign now moves back to the courts; the four applicants
will take their case to the European Court of Human Rights, while others
now being discharged will challenge the ban under the European Community
Equal Treatment Directive.
How they voted
Conservative
(326 MPs): 180 MPs voted to keep the ban; 8 voted to lift it. The 8 who
voted to lift the ban were: Sir Andrew Bowden, Michael Brown, Matthew
Carrington, Edwina Currie, Jerry Hayes, Robert Hughes, Andrew Rowe, and
Sir Nicholas Scott.
Labour
(274 MPs): 97 MPs voted to lift the ban; 8 voted to keep it. The 8 who
voted to keep the ban were: Don Dixon, Bruce George, Terry Lewis, John
Morris, John Reid, Peter Snape, John Spellar, and Dennis Turner.
Liberal Democrats
(25 MPs): 16 MPs voted to lift the ban; none voted to keep it.
SNP
Alex Salmond voted to lift the ban.
HOUSING GUIDELINES
The Housing Bill has shown how far the government, and Environment
Secretary John Selwyn Gummer in particular, are prepared to go to avoid
giving us any rights. Faced with Glenda Jackson's amendment to give
lesbian and gay partners equal rights of succession in housing the
government overturned the vote of the Standing Committee and instead
published new guidance for local authorities.
Circular 7/96, "Local Authority Joint Tenancies", encourages
local authorities to grant joint tenancies to adults who share
accommodation as "friends or unpaid live-in-carers", provided they are
assured of the "likely continuance of such a partnership" and "there are
no adverse implications for good use of authorities' housing stock."
Local authorities are also asked to grant a new tenancy where a
member of a household dies and another member of that household does not
have the right to succeed, but "had been living with the tenant for the
year before the tenant's death, or had been looking after the tenant, or
had accepted responsibility for the tenant's dependants."
The circular carefully avoids all mention of same sex partners
as poor Mr Gummer cannot bear the thought never mind the words. We hope
the circular will be a marginal improvement, but it does nothing for
similar cases in the private rented sector, and, of course, it is the
worst authorities who are most likely to ignore it.
Lady Hamwee, a Liberal Democrat, is now proposing a further
amendment in the Lords which would give statutory rights to succession
for all tenants.
CRIMINAL RECORDS
Besides wanting a national database of men convicted of soliciting or
gross indecency (see opposite) Michael Howard has had another bright
idea that would affect men convicted or cautioned for these offences.
He now proposes to privatise criminal record checks and to greatly
extend the class of employers who have a right of access to criminal
records when making recruitment decisions.
We are very concerned about this proposal because gross
indecency is a uniquely gay offence - so thousands of men with a
conviction or even a caution for gross indecency will effectively be
outed to prospective employers.
Yet another argument for repealing the offence of gross
indecency - but in the meantime we must react quickly and object to
these proposals!
HOWARD'S PLAN TO PUT GAY SEX OFFENDERS ON A REGISTER
Michael Howard has published wide-ranging proposals to deal with sex
offenders in a consultation paper, Sentencing and Supervision of Sex
Offenders, published in June.
Although promoted as an attempt to deal with paedophiles, the
proposals actually deal with a wide range of sex offenders including gay
and bisexual men convicted of victimless, consenting offences such as
gross indecency, buggery and soliciting.
We set out the main proposals here and then tell you how you can
make your objections known.
A national register of sex offenders
Howard proposes that convicted sex offenders should be required to
notify the police of any change of address.
We would not object in principle if this only applied to those
convicted of offences such as rape or sex with children. As defined
however it also includes those convicted of gross indecency, buggery and
soliciting whatever the age of the other party!
Hundreds of gay and bisexual men are convicted of gross
indecency every year. In 99.9% of cases these are public sex offences,
not offences involving sex with children. Gross indecency is always a
consenting offence - the Court of Appeal has said so. Buggery is also a
consenting offence - without consent it is rape. No case is made why
men convicted of such offences should have to tell the police whenever
they move home so that their whereabouts can be kept on a national
database.
The government will probably argue that it is necessary to
include these offences because in a very small number of cases they
represent age of consent offences. However sex with boys aged under 16
can always if appropriate be charged as "indecent assault on a boy under
16", which would remain in the list of sexual offences included.
Note that the government is considering making the requirement
to register retrospective. This means it could apply to men who were
convicted of these offences in the past. If so thousands of gay and
bisexual men with previous convictions would be affected.
Extended supervision of jailed sex offenders
Howard proposes that the courts should have the power to require
extended periods of supervision in the community in the case of sex
offenders who are sent to prison. It is also suggested that ex-
prisoners might be electronically tagged. The list of sex offences is
the same. The paper says it does not need to be narrower because it is
only in the case of very serious offences that a sentence of
imprisonment will be imposed in the first place. We do not agree. A
young gay man could be sentenced to prison just for having sex with his
boyfriend aged 17. Far from being a serious offence this should not be
an offence in the first place.
A ban on seeking employment involving access to children
Howard proposes to make it a criminal offence for certain sex offenders
to seek employment involving access to children under 18, and possibly
also to seek to foster children. The list of sexual offences for the
purpose of this offence is confined to "those convicted of offences
against children". However the paper does not define what this means.
As "children" in terms of "access to children" are defined as children
under 18, "offences against children" might well include consenting sex
with a 17 year old.
Juvenile sex offenders
Howard suggests that the proposals for supervision and sentencing of sex
offenders generally should also apply to juveniles. Since young gay men
are themselves committing an offence if they have sex before they are
18, and since their partners are also likely to be under 18, they could
be hard hit by this proposal.
How to protest:
It is essential that as many people as possible respond to the
consultation paper and protest about the proposals. Comments should be
sent by Friday 9 August to
Mr K Hopley
Action Against Crime Unit
Home Office
50 Queen Anne's Gate
London SW1H 9AT
Please make these points:
* Gross indecency, buggery and soliciting should not be defined as
sexual offences for these proposals because they are victimless
offences.
* Where sex with a boy under 16 is considered abusive it would not
normally be charged as gross indecency but as indecent assault.
* If these offences are included there should be an additional
requirement so that the proposals would not apply to victimless
offences, for example a requirement that the other party was under 16.
* If the other party was 14 or over it should also be a
requirement that the younger person actually complained of the
offender's behaviour, or that the offender had abused a position of
authority over the young person. This could also apply in the case of
unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under 16.
* The meaning of "offences against children" in the new criminal
offence of seeking employment with access to children should be subject
to the same requirement.
* The proposals should not apply retrospectively and they should
not apply to juveniles.
Please write to your MP too!
PRIDE REPORT
Stonewall had its biggest contingent ever on Pride this year -
accompanied by a samba band.
At the Pride Festival, Stonewall worked with Canadian Club,
Beefeater Gin, Kahlua and Courvoisier to reach even more lesbians and
gay men than ever with the message of equality for us all. In a
specially designed marquee on the edge of the main arena, Stonewall
joined forces with these Allied Domecq brands and Zone FM to present its
major campaigns and to raise funds for its work.
Many thanks to Allied Domecq for their support - and to all
those volunteers and supporters who marched with us at Pride and who
helped out at the Festival.
We also attended Pride Scotland and we will be taking part in
the gay Mardi Gras in Manchester this August.
THERE IS A GAY VOTE
"Think pink before you vote" was our slogan at the last election. Final
results from our supporters survey suggest that lesbians and gay men are
indeed more likely to vote for parties they see as supportive of lesbian
and gay rights.
Out of 2,000 Stonewall supporters and Gay Times readers, we
found that 10% voted Conservative, 49% voted Labour, 14% voted Liberal
Democrat, and 27% said it varied or they didn't vote. Even allowing for
the fact that Labour are currently well ahead in the opinion polls one
would have expected more people to vote Conservative.
Only 2% of lesbians said they vote Tory compared with 12% of gay
men!
Even among high earners, who would generally be more likely to vote
Tory, only 12% of those on 40-50,000 pounds a year and only 20% of
those on 50,000 pounds or more said they vote Tory.
SEMINAR SELLS OUT
The Stonewall Immigration Group held a one day seminar on immigration
rights for same-sex couples in the EC on Friday 5 July. The main
questions put to our guest speakers were:
* What rights can we assert under current EU law?
* How can we achieve the right to move freely within the European
Union with our non-European partners?
* Will the intergovernmental conference make things better or
worse?
* What will be the effect of gay marriage in the Netherlands?
* Can we claim the protection of the European Convention on Human
Rights?
Guest speakers included many prominent immigration lawyers and European
lawyers. The seminar was sold out and it was such a success we hope to
repeat it again next year.
PHOTO STORY
On 8 May the South African Parliament voted overwhelmingly for the new
constitution which prohibits discrimination on the ground of sexual
orientation. To celebrate this historic victory a delegation including
Ian McKellen, Peter Tatchell, Angela Mason and representatives from
Liberty, Gays and Lesbians In Zimbabwe and LGCM went to South Africa
House to congratulate the High Commissioner Mendi Msimang, who expressed
his support for the principle of equality (photo sadly not available on
Internet).
WISH YOU WERE HERE?
(Pictured: new postcard)
The Stonewall Immigration Group is launching an awareness campaign.
Since the launch of our campaign to change the immigration rules we have
had 13 successful applications and none have failed. However despite
intensive lobbying we have seen no softening of the Home Office position
and doubt whether anything will now change until after the general
election.
We have therefore decided that our focus between now and the
election will be awareness of the Group. In the past many couples who
faced immigration problems often only found out about the group after
things started to go wrong. In the last month we have seen three couples
who entered into marriages of convenience - one was arrested and his
lesbian wife was threatened with criminal charges, another was
blackmailed for 11,000 pounds and a third had paid 3,000 pounds and his
"wife" then disappeared. All three would have much better advised to
have applied on the basis of their long-term and committed same-sex
relationship.
We have therefore produced 40,000 postcards and 2,000 posters
featuring two couples from the group who are currently applying to stay
here based on their relationship. We will be distributing the postcards
and posters to every lesbian and gay venue in the UK over the next few
weeks. If you would like some please get in touch.
Mark Watson, Chair, Stonewall Immigration Group
Stonewall Campaign Groups
Stonewall Parenting Group
The Parenting Group now meets monthly in congenial surroundings at The
Link, near Camden Town, London. Meetings take place alternately on
Saturday and Sunday afternoons. Meetings are open to anyone interested
in parenting issues. The first part of the meeting gives plenty of time
for socialising. Children are welcome - it's an opportunity for them to
meet and socialise as well as the grown ups. An enjoyable lunch is
followed by a meeting which is usually organised around a topic. So far
we have discussed schools and the draft Adoption Bill. We submitted
comments on the draft Bill calling for same sex couples to be allowed to
adopt and for same sex partners to be allowed to apply for parental
responsibility just as step parents will be allowed to under the new
proposals.
The Parenting Group and children marched with the Stonewall contingent
at Pride. Future plans include a summer outing and a children's
Christmas party.
Stonewall Pensions Campaign
The Pensions group successfully lobbied the Inland Revenue to make it
clear to trustees that pension schemes do have discretion to pay a
survivors pension to same sex partners. We now intend to produce a
simple guide with a model clause and nominations forms.
Several trade unions are working with us to help change company
schemes. For those in the private sector only a change in policy is
required. For the big public sector statutory schemes the rules will
have to be changed by Parliament, but as new agencies are being set up
to adminster these schemes it is important to keep the issue high on the
agenda.
Many employers schemes could be affected if Lisa Grant wins her
equal pay case against South West Trains (see p.3). If your scheme
excludes same sex partners but includes common law partners, please let
us know.
Stonewall Immigration Group
The Stonewall Immigration Group campaigns for equal immigration rights
for same-sex couples. The Group meets on the third Saturday of each
month and offers free legal advice and information to lesbians and gay
men with immigration problems which they would not face if they were
heterosexual.
For more information on any of these groups please write to Mark Watson
at Stonewall or call him on 0171 336 8860 from 2-5pm.
Stonewall
16 Clerkenwell Close
London EC1R 0AA
Tel: 0171 336 8860
Fax: 0171 336 8864
E-Mail: info@stonewall.org.UK
ISSN 1358-6807
Stonewall staff
Angela Mason
Executive Director
Anya Palmer
Deputy Director
Mark Watson
Development Worker
John Nicholls
Head of Fundraising
Mig Kimpton
Events Producer
Millie Patrick
Office Manager
Mark Roche
Administrator
Stonewall Board
Gill Butler
Andy Elvers
Lee Marshall, Treasurer
John Miskelly, Deputy Chair
Rebecca Rendle
Dr Peter Rivas
Elaine Willis, Chair
Stonewall Group
Board members, plus:
Louise Ansari
Michael Cashman
Cordelia Ditton
Simon Fanshawe
Edmund Hall
Rob Hayward
Anne Lawrence
Gerard Lemos
Ian McKellen
Lucy Scher
Mark Washer
Mark Watson
Stonewall
16 Clerkenwell Close
London
EC1R 0AA
Tel. 0171 336 8860
Fax. 0171 336 8864
mark@stonewall.org.uk
http://www.tyger.co.uk/sig/